Okay saying functionally similar parts should not be classified differently based on design is one of the stupidest things I've ever seen said by a purportedly smart person. All paintball guns functionally launch a paintball at about 300 fps, should there be no distinction between them because they are functionally similar?

what? at no point in your incoherent ramblings did you even come close to what could rationally be considered a reasonable point. i award you no points and my god have mercy on your soul.

paintball guns that do all launch paintball at 300 fps are grouped together ... its a group called paintball guns. inside that group we have different types of operating paintball guns. a subset being a gun which increases air pressure on one side of a poppet to push it open, and allow the power pulse out. this is what etha is. this is contrast to decreasing force PCPs, which drop the pressure on one side of the poppet to release the power pulse, or contact poppets (true Poppets) where a hammer/rammer pushes the valve open, there are also "balanced" spools, and unbalanced spools (often short handly called blowforwards).

whether to poppet has a face seal (like the mini) or an oring seal (like the etha), doesn't much matter. what matters and what differentiates those two guns is the method that is used to open the valve. one being adding force to one side, the other being adding force and decreasing force to the other. that IS functionally different, not the type of seal that is formed.

The ultimate truth in paintball is that the interaction between the gun and the player is far and away the largest factor in accuracy, consistency, and reliability.

You just classified functionally interchangeable items based on design.

Let's make it simple. You cannot disregard design when discussing design even if something serves the same function as something else. I mean this is really, really basic stuff, how are you missing this?

i base my assessment of functional dependence based on there function.

we are discussing the function of the gun, and in this gun (not all) but in this gun, face seal vs radial seal doesn't make a functional difference. so it doesn't make sense to classify its function based on something that doesn't make a difference to its function. it functions as an increasing force pressure controlled poppet.

so in specifying and categorizing its function vs other guns functions, it is an increasing force pressure controlled poppet.

EDIT: feel free to us "operation" interchangeably for "function" if that makes more sense to you. i tire of your semantic bull shit.

Edited by cockerpunk, 16 January 2012 - 04:49 PM.

The ultimate truth in paintball is that the interaction between the gun and the player is far and away the largest factor in accuracy, consistency, and reliability.

I'm not sure if this is the source of confusion, but just because the firing valve has a structure that moves independently of the bolt, doesn't mean it's a poppet valve. Frankly the legion shocker is misclassified on ZDSPB as a poppet, if you look at the valve operation it is more or less identical to several of the spool configurations, with the difference being the bolt is not part of the moving structure. But the bolt being attached or operated independently has nothing to do with whether the firing valve is a spool or poppet.

It's not that the valve is separate from the bolt, it's that we could take out the radial sealing valve in the Etha, throw in one with a face seal, and the gun would operate the same. It's because it doesn't matter if it's a face or radial seal that we have to look at the other characteristics to help us name it, and because those other characteristics are those of a poppet, that's what we go with.

It's not that the valve is separate from the bolt, it's that we could take out the radial sealing valve in the Etha, throw in one with a face seal, and the gun would operate the same.

Right but that doesn't mean the two valves aren't different. This idea that two structures can't be classified differently because they do the same thing is ridiculous. All firing valves do the same thing.

I just see a completely inline poppet design. The fact the the seal has an oring instead of a face is only one characteristic of a spool. The rest are poppet. Its kinda hard to argue that its a spool when only one thing about the gun is designed like a spool is, yet the rest of the characteristics yell poppet. Correct me if i'm wrong.

I just see a completely inline poppet design. The fact the the seal has an oring instead of a face is only one characteristic of a spool. The rest are poppet. Its kinda hard to argue that its a spool when only one thing about the gun is designed like a spool is, yet the rest of the characteristics yell poppet. Correct me if i'm wrong.

The seal IS what makes a gun, broadly, a poppet or spool. So yeah that one characteristic matters a lot.

But additional to that, I fail to see how any of the rest of the operation is poppet-like. It's completely spool-like. That thing moving in the middle of the gun is a spool.

short quick acting nature of a poppetincreasing pressure to act as a ram as found in other poppetsoring to seal the dump chamber is not on the bolt.

spool likeness:

oring seal instead of face seal.

Shortness or longness of action has nothing AT ALL to do with whether a valve is structurally a poppet or spool. Nothing at all. Throw this little piece of BS marketing out the window because it's irrelevant.Ramlike pressure control is a nearly universal feature of spools while for most of their existence poppet valves in paintball markers used completely mechanical actuation. Please take a moment to go through the spool animations on ZDSPB.The bolt is irrelevant to anything. You can take any valve structure, put it in a lower tube, and have a completely independent bolt in a tube above it.

its not a matter of lining up its spoolness vs is poppetness. its a pressure controlled poppet, IE pressure changes open and close the poppet valve, and it does this by increasing the force on one side - ergo increasing force pressure controlled poppet.

The ultimate truth in paintball is that the interaction between the gun and the player is far and away the largest factor in accuracy, consistency, and reliability.

Okay, putting aside the debate on how to catagorize this marker, can someone explain (in average Joe terms and language) what makes this marker's design "brilliant"? I mean, why did PE go with this design, rather than a dumbed down version of one of their other markers? To the average paintballer, what makes this design better / worse in their hands, as opposed to admiring it from a pure engineering point of view?

Apologies if this has already been explained somewhere before. I missed that part.

The benefit of a poppet is excellent valve resolution - in other words it's really easy to meter how much air you're using. The benefit of a spool is a slower, longer power stroke of the valve. This uses a short throw, high resolution valve to trigger the larger spool valve - so it's a simple yet well controlled design.

The benefit of a poppet is excellent valve resolution - in other words it's really easy to meter how much air you're using. The benefit of a spool is a slower, longer power stroke of the valve. This uses a short throw, high resolution valve to trigger the larger spool valve - so it's a simple yet well controlled design.

So, theoretically this could be more air efficient and consistent than some spoolies, yet retain some of the firing (feel) characteristics of a spool over a poppet?

The benefit of a poppet is excellent valve resolution - in other words it's really easy to meter how much air you're using. The benefit of a spool is a slower, longer power stroke of the valve. This uses a short throw, high resolution valve to trigger the larger spool valve - so it's a simple yet well controlled design.

So, theoretically this could be more air efficient and consistent than some spoolies, yet retain some of the firing (feel) characteristics of a spool over a poppet?

Because it's a closed firing chamber, and the fact that the poppet valve is separate from the bolt, doesn't that sort of render what kind of valve it is pointless? Once the firing chamber is open to the bolt, it's the opening of the bolt that determines how the firing chamber empties, so isn't the poppet only good for starting the cycle, but not the actual efficiency?

We are starting to tread pretty heavily on my home turf now (at least my area of training, taxonomy is a long ways away from computer programming). What we have here is a, classic problem of natural kinds. The real problem is how much of a subjective weight we put on which specific attributes of the valve to determine it's kind. Anytime you create a definition, if it's too broad, it's not useful, if it's too narrow, it's not useful either. No matter what the criteria is, the underlining flaw in a definition is that it's based in some kind of subjective quality assessment (unless you are a Platonist though, and you think the perfect spool valve is running around in the realm of forms).

My specialization is in plant taxonomy, which is, pretty much, the oldest science around. We were classifying plants into groups before we had language. The kicker is, that it's barely a science at all. Plant groups are divided into groups on pretty much purely subjective differences (classifying things genetically is not an answer btw, I'm not going to go into that, so I don't derail the thread).

When I first got into an immunology lab (believe it or not plant tax isn't, exactly, one of those "in demand" job fields, and I had a bio-chem degree after all...), the primary investigator explained the purpose of his research, what he was doing, and his goals in pure metaphor. I responded "I don't like to talk in metaphors" he said "well then, I can't talk to you about science."

The point of this long rant is that whenever you are doing something cool and "scientific," you need to man up and rise to the challenge. Not everything is precise, not everything is black and white... IN FACT, in my experience, if you are doing something cool, you're working in shades of grey.

Btw, I'm going to call this a spool as well, for more pragmatic reasons rather than operational reasons. It uses grease instead of oil... it's a spool

Yay! A fellow plant taxonomist! You sir, have a pm your way!

Now back on topic...There is both a spool valve and a poppet in there. The poppet controls the rest, so i think "I.F. Pressure controlled poppet" is a good description.

Oldnewb: Yes, the design is more efficient. Yoda on MCB makes conversion kits for the vibe/ion etc. that are similar design to the legion. They are more efficient. Im not sure about noise or smoothness.

Wiki says a poppet valve "consists of a hole, usually round or oval, and a tapered plug, usually a disk shape on the end of a shaft also called a valve stem. The shaft guides the plug portion by sliding through a valve guide. In most applications a pressure differential helps to seal the valve and in some applications also open it."

That and (at least I'm under the impression that) a "spool valve" normally refers to something like a 3-way due to the spool shape of the valve rod.

So my question is, why are we even classifying it? Normally a classification would help to make rapid generalizations about the subject, but in this case the subject seems to defy that.

I really don't think this case is one of the closer cases. This thing is very much a spool. The idea of calling it a poppet in any way, shape, or form smacks of marketing. There are much more arguable designs out there.

Bryce, Danny, thanks for your replies (although now I'm confused why this design isn't on "higher-end" markers if it's that much better).

The reason why I asked is that an average paintballer doesn't care what's going on internally with their marker. The reason why they want to know if the marker is a poppet or a spool is because people have been telling them for years, if you want an air efficient marker with low maintenance, go with a poppet. If you want a smooth shooting, quieter marker and are willing to give up a little air efficiency and do a bit more maintenance, go with a spool. The average (ie no engineering background) guy just wants to know how to catagorize this marker because they want it to know what it'll be like to own... not because they want to understand how it works.

In any case, this seems like a promising design for those who want something that does a little bit of everything. That's the overall impression I'm getting.

Oh, and I'm just starting to follow what going on with those crazy Ions over at MCB. Those mechanical Ions look especially promising and fun to play with. (Sorry, off topic a bit).

I assume that they put this in the mid price bracket because it's easy to manufacture. My guess (although I don't have numbers to back it up) is that it prob feels mostly like a classic spool valve when shooting - but that it will get less efficiency than a poppet.

It's possible that with the sealed dump chamber and dual stage action they might be able to save some cash on the solenoid and the electronic side - I'm not sure.

I wouldn't say that it's better than either the classic poppet or classic spool design - it's just different.

And yes, I need to get my mech in up and running - it's a fun shooter.

Yeah, there is no poppet in that one either. That one, as I said earlier, is miscategorized by ZDSPB. That is not a poppet, that is a spool.

I believe that falls into the artistic license category on Andy's part - not a miscategorization. The patent for the Legion Shocker clearly shows an identical valve layout that has a tapered step around the o-ring at the tip that makes a face seal, not an axial seal as shown in the animation. Identical action, very minor variation in how the actual seal is made. And valve resolution and minimized pre-expansion volume helping efficiency aside, the Etha could be configured so that the firing piston (what I've been calling it in my closed bolt Ion configurations just to avoid arguments over the semantics involved) shifts forward before the dump chamber vents completely, trapping residual pressure within to further boost efficiencies.

I'm looking forward to someone devolumizing the piss out of one of these, cranking the pressures, and running a very low dwell.&nbsp; Probably not so nice on paint, but I would guess a nice efficiency boost as well.<br>

I would submit that the "variation" is not so minor after all, seeing as how it changes what type of valve it is. Fairly or not the nomenclature has acquired connotations in paintball that may make a manufacturer or other interested party want to call a valve one thing or another, but one would think that in a forum ostensibly for cutting through the BS, we should not muddy the waters by buying into just that kind of perceptional bias.

I would submit that the "variation" is not so minor after all, seeing as how it changes what type of valve it is. Fairly or not the nomenclature has acquired connotations in paintball that may make a manufacturer or other interested party want to call a valve one thing or another, but one would think that in a forum ostensibly for cutting through the BS, we should not muddy the waters by buying into just that kind of perceptional bias.

but it doesn't change how the gun works, so its dumb to categorize a gun based on that. your the only one muddying the waters by talking about one minor thing not how the entire system functions. its an increasing force pressure controlled poppet.

I'm looking forward to someone devolumizing the piss out of one of these, cranking the pressures, and running a very low dwell.&nbsp; Probably not so nice on paint, but I would guess a nice efficiency boost as well.<br>

if you were able to redesign the bolt system for those higher pressures, it wouldn't be hard on paint. reduced diameter = reduced bolt forward force.

Edited by cockerpunk, 16 January 2012 - 10:18 PM.

The ultimate truth in paintball is that the interaction between the gun and the player is far and away the largest factor in accuracy, consistency, and reliability.

but it doesn't change how the gun works, so its dumb to categorize a gun based on that. your the only one muddying the waters by talking about one minor thing not how the entire system functions. its an increasing force pressure controlled poppet.

Well, the operation of this gun is spool valve, so that doesn't make any point in your favor. The structure in the middle of the gun is a spool. It works pretty much like a classic spool valve design. I don't see how you can look at the animations and not see that. It's as plain as day and acknowledged by the designers. The only thing that would make it a poppet is a poppet-type structure controlling the firing pulse.

Yoda already cleared up the issue with the Legion Shocker as it being misdrawn. The Etha originally had a poppet seal for the front of the spool, which is where that terminology originated from, and it was carried through the process for pragmatic reasons. It made it into marketing copy for marketing reasons.

but it doesn't change how the gun works, so its dumb to categorize a gun based on that. your the only one muddying the waters by talking about one minor thing not how the entire system functions. its an increasing force pressure controlled poppet.

Well, the operation of this gun is spool valve, so that doesn't make any point in your favor. The structure in the middle of the gun is a spool. It works pretty much like a classic spool valve design. I don't see how you can look at the animations and not see that. It's as plain as day and acknowledged by the designers. The only thing that would make it a poppet is a poppet-type structure controlling the firing pulse.

Yoda already cleared up the issue with the Legion Shocker as it being misdrawn. The Etha originally had a poppet seal for the front of the spool, which is where that terminology originated from, and it was carried through the process for pragmatic reasons. It made it into marketing copy for marketing reasons.

the operation of the gun is not spool valve. its a pressure controlled poppet valve.

The ultimate truth in paintball is that the interaction between the gun and the player is far and away the largest factor in accuracy, consistency, and reliability.

the operation of the gun is not spool valve. its a pressure controlled poppet valve.

Based on what? You literally have no reason for saying that, you're just repeating bullshit. Radial seals sliding back and forth in a bore = spool.

All spool firing mechanisms I can think of are pressure controlled. The operation is similar to a Threshold/G4 with the plunger moving instead of the bolt.

He has already explained why he believes it to be a pressure controlled poppet valve. Your logic for calling is a spool is sound, but it fails on the subject of properly categorizing the guns functionality. Calling this gun a "spool" with no other modifiers implies it functions like traditional spools, and is so not completely accurate.

the operation of the gun is not spool valve. its a pressure controlled poppet valve.

Based on what? You literally have no reason for saying that, you're just repeating bullshit. Radial seals sliding back and forth in a bore = spool.

All spool firing mechanisms I can think of are pressure controlled. The operation is similar to a Threshold/G4 with the plunger moving instead of the bolt.

He has already explained why he believes it to be a pressure controlled poppet valve. Your logic for calling is a spool is sound, but it fails on the subject of properly categorizing the guns functionality. Calling this gun a "spool" with no other modifiers implies it functions like traditional spools, and is so not completely accurate.

correct

it may have a spool valve type seal, but it does not operate like a balanced (shocker) or unbalanced (G3/4) spool valve.

The ultimate truth in paintball is that the interaction between the gun and the player is far and away the largest factor in accuracy, consistency, and reliability.

a) Made your minds up about a new classification system or2) killed each other with iBombs....

The problem is we are trying to use 1 term to describe valve and bolt operation. It must surely be time to seperate bolt and valve function at the very least in descriptions.

Etha would be a FASR Bolt With Pressure Controlled Spool Valve.Ego Would be a Electropneumatic Bolt with Impact ValveGeo would be a Blow Forward Spool Valved Bolt

i have no problem adding FASOR bolt or even blowforward to increasing force pressure controlled poppet. that would actually be the perfect way to tell this gun apart front the legion shocker design, which is closed bolt increasing force pressure controlled poppet. and further from the shocker sport, which is an increasing force pressure controlled poppet with a ram controlled bolt.

Edited by cockerpunk, 17 January 2012 - 01:19 PM.

The ultimate truth in paintball is that the interaction between the gun and the player is far and away the largest factor in accuracy, consistency, and reliability.

i have no problem adding FASOR bolt or even blowforward to increasing force pressure controlled poppet. that would actually be the perfect way to tell this gun apart front the legion shocker design, which is closed bolt increasing force pressure controlled poppet. and further from the shocker sport, which is an increasing force pressure controlled poppet with a ram controlled bolt.

Gordon, what influences you away from the ZDSPB and other (Wiki: "Poppet", Tooling U: "spool") definitions of "Spool" and "Poppet" valves if we were to break down the marker to sub-components?

i have no problem adding FASOR bolt or even blowforward to increasing force pressure controlled poppet. that would actually be the perfect way to tell this gun apart front the legion shocker design, which is closed bolt increasing force pressure controlled poppet. and further from the shocker sport, which is an increasing force pressure controlled poppet with a ram controlled bolt.

Gordon, what influences you away from the ZDSPB and other (Wiki: "Poppet", Tooling U: "spool") definitions of "Spool" and "Poppet" valves if we were to break down the marker to sub-components?

well the term Poppet valve comes from automotive valves, which are mostly tapered valves (basically both face and radial seal). this is because it is hard to pre load a face seal without a plastic liner (and in a car plastic would melt) and a radial seal again requires a conformable seal, a tapered seal makes the most sense. so i find that face vs radial thing a bit simplistic. although for most paintball guns it is accurate. pressure controlled poppets are really the only thing hard to classify, basically it means its not a spool valve cause the valve and bolt arnt the same thing, but it doesn't have a true poppet valve either. in this light, odd guns become very easy to classify. and in looking at "classic" spool and poppet guns you start to see PCPs pop (pun intended) up all over the place. it really is a much better way to classify guns.

The ultimate truth in paintball is that the interaction between the gun and the player is far and away the largest factor in accuracy, consistency, and reliability.

While it is a seemingly simple difference, it is not simplistic at all, as the design considerations between the two are quite different.But whether the difference is simple OR simplistic has no bearing on whether something falls into one category of design or another. There is simply no reason to use the term based on nothing more than flawed drawing. CP seems simply mentally stuck on the term and cannot get off it; maybe others can suggest why that is.

But the claims made by CP and others are in fact quite wrong, the operation is in fact essentially traditional spool. Any spool operation is going to be either balanced or unbalanced; the Etha main spool is a balanced design, the bolt is unbalanced. Looking at the spool diagrams a little closer, a Quest is very very similar in operation:

The only difference is that the spool moves rather than the cylinder. "Spool with blow-forward bolt" would be a pretty accurate description of the operation of the Etha, using existing terms. However marker operatiion description usually prioritizes the firing valve over the bolt operation, e.g. a Sovereign is a poppet gun despite its spool bolt. So in a single term, the Etha is a spool valve gun.

I don't think the geometry of the Etha being somewhat similar to the Quest is really relevant - Jack Wood himself came in and made the sensible distinction to separate bolt and valve motion in the nomenclature.

While it is a seemingly simple difference, it is not simplistic at all, as the design considerations between the two are quite different.But whether the difference is simple OR simplistic has no bearing on whether something falls into one category of design or another. There is simply no reason to use the term based on nothing more than flawed drawing. CP seems simply mentally stuck on the term and cannot get off it; maybe others can suggest why that is.

But the claims made by CP and others are in fact quite wrong, the operation is in fact essentially traditional spool. Any spool operation is going to be either balanced or unbalanced; the Etha main spool is a balanced design, the bolt is unbalanced. Looking at the spool diagrams a little closer, a Quest is very very similar in operation:

The only difference is that the spool moves rather than the cylinder. "Spool with blow-forward bolt" would be a pretty accurate description of the operation of the Etha, using existing terms. However marker operatiion description usually prioritizes the firing valve over the bolt operation, e.g. a Sovereign is a poppet gun despite its spool bolt. So in a single term, the Etha is a spool valve gun.

While it is a seemingly simple difference, it is not simplistic at all, as the design considerations between the two are quite different.But whether the difference is simple OR simplistic has no bearing on whether something falls into one category of design or another. There is simply no reason to use the term based on nothing more than flawed drawing. CP seems simply mentally stuck on the term and cannot get off it; maybe others can suggest why that is.

But the claims made by CP and others are in fact quite wrong, the operation is in fact essentially traditional spool. Any spool operation is going to be either balanced or unbalanced; the Etha main spool is a balanced design, the bolt is unbalanced. Looking at the spool diagrams a little closer, a Quest is very very similar in operation:

The only difference is that the spool moves rather than the cylinder. "Spool with blow-forward bolt" would be a pretty accurate description of the operation of the Etha, using existing terms. However marker operatiion description usually prioritizes the firing valve over the bolt operation, e.g. a Sovereign is a poppet gun despite its spool bolt. So in a single term, the Etha is a spool valve gun.

How is the etha diagram similar to that ^

I don't know how to answer this. Look at it. Now, hold the bolt still and move the spool back and forth. The gas paths are nearly identical, with the control feed placed behind the main feed because the moving structures are transposed in the gun layout.

While it is a seemingly simple difference, it is not simplistic at all, as the design considerations between the two are quite different.But whether the difference is simple OR simplistic has no bearing on whether something falls into one category of design or another. There is simply no reason to use the term based on nothing more than flawed drawing. CP seems simply mentally stuck on the term and cannot get off it; maybe others can suggest why that is.

But the claims made by CP and others are in fact quite wrong, the operation is in fact essentially traditional spool. Any spool operation is going to be either balanced or unbalanced; the Etha main spool is a balanced design, the bolt is unbalanced. Looking at the spool diagrams a little closer, a Quest is very very similar in operation:

The only difference is that the spool moves rather than the cylinder. "Spool with blow-forward bolt" would be a pretty accurate description of the operation of the Etha, using existing terms. However marker operatiion description usually prioritizes the firing valve over the bolt operation, e.g. a Sovereign is a poppet gun despite its spool bolt. So in a single term, the Etha is a spool valve gun.

How is the etha diagram similar to that ^

I don't know how to answer this. Look at it. Now, hold the bolt still and move the spool back and forth. The gas paths are nearly identical, with the control feed placed behind the main feed because the moving structures are transposed in the gun layout.

so if the gun operated completely differently, then it would be like this other gun that operates completely differently?

The ultimate truth in paintball is that the interaction between the gun and the player is far and away the largest factor in accuracy, consistency, and reliability.

so if the gun operated completely differently, then it would be like this other gun that operates completely differently?

Eh?

I don't think the geometry of the Etha being somewhat similar to the Quest is really relevant - Jack Wood himself came in and made the sensible distinction to separate bolt and valve motion in the nomenclature.

1) Why wouldn't it be relevant?2) We have been separating it in the case of poppet guns for years now, but never mention the bolt operation in the nomenclature. Why not?3) Even if we separate the two, there is still no poppet in this gun. This gun is simply not a poppet at all. If anything it's two spools, or a spool and a ram/bolt.